Splinter Cell Double Agent PS3 IGN Review..

[chris100]

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/778/778514p1.html

Graphically, the game looks good, but falls short of the detailed display Sam saw on Xbox 360 last year. Players who ran through the paces in Microsoft-land will notice a slower framerate and the loss of a few small details (things like a smaller quantity of fights during the prison riot, different textures on character close-ups and no goggle-toggle when tossing on Sams specs).

Dude, wtf? And this is from the studio that made its name last generation by
being at the tech forefront?

Overall 7.9 (Xbox360 9.0)

SC4 maybe the last SC game on PS3 platform,SC5 would be 360 exclusive title.

 

[djskribbles]

most of the third party devs seem to be struggling with the ps3 hardware (with exception to Bethesda).

 

[NERO]

I do not have the expertise to give an analysis on the reasons for these PS3, "lower grade" ports, but am sure doom and gloom will spread from this newest example. But I will preempt the complainers by saying, wait for more PS3 to 360 ports and see if this remains the same.

 

[bRoNx]

most of the third party devs seem to be struggling with the ps3 hardware (with exception to Bethesda).

Struggling? No, I'd give 'em more credit than that. I just think they get their code running on PS3 at an *acceptable* level (at least to them) and so they release it.

Forget optimizing for the PS3, because that's not a cost effective model. IMHO.

 

[AlNom]

no goggle-toggle when tossing on Sam's specs

er....isn't that like... a standard feature for the SC series... [/sarcasm]



If the videos are representative of the framerate, it's going to be a bit tough to play I think. While it's still a relatively slow-paced game, responsiveness is quite crucial, especially for changing your movement speed and direction.

Show me more of teh female Cell!

 

[Fu3lFr3nzy]

I do not have the expertise to give an analysis on the reasons for these PS3, "lower grade" ports, but am sure doom and gloom will spread from this newest example. But I will preempt the complainers by saying, wait for more PS3 to 360 ports and see if this remains the same.

Well, "no one" is doubting that future MP games might be in PS3's favor, but until then, X360 remains the better platform for most MP games

 

[DaWizeGuy]

It sound like they just did a simple conversion. No wonder it runs like crap since it's not easy to translate 360 code into something which runs well on PS3.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Well the good news is PS3 owners aren't missing out on much, Ubisoft Shanghai did another one of their 'just barely good enough' sequals.

Actually a signifigant step backwards from Chaos Theory imo, which had much more freedom and less trial and error. In DA, they start out with soem variety, but very quickly get locked into the trial and error routine which Chaos Theory had nearly done away with.

Looking forward to the true sequal this holiday, given what they did with Chaos Theory, I'm expecting ubisoft montreal to do some pretty amazing stuff.

 

[Todd33]

Too bad Ubi did a poor port, maybe PS3 owners will not buy it while games like Oblivion will sell well. You have to vote with your $$.

Anyhow the game, even on the 360 was crap IMO. You can find it near $20 on the 360. The game play online and off was a downgrade from the Xbox Chaos Theory, which is BC.

I'm sure this port will make good fanboy fodder though.

 

[Ben-Nice]

Off topic. Shoud I buy Chaos Theory for my PC. I saw it for $20 the other day. I hear it's the best one.

 

[-tkf-]

most of the third party devs seem to be struggling with the ps3 hardware (with exception to Bethesda).

Hmmm

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=74502

 

[AlNom]

Off topic. Shoud I buy Chaos Theory for my PC. I saw it for $20 the other day. I hear it's the best one.

Definitely It's a huge step in the right direction from the previous titles. Scooby nailed it on the head with respect to the trial and error issue. There are many incidents that have different solutions (that and the PC version is very polished).

 

[infinity4]

most of the third party devs seem to be struggling with the ps3 hardware (with exception to Bethesda).

didn't they had 1 more year to play around with ps3 version??? wonder how game would look like on both platforms had they both been released last week not a year ago.

anyway there is less incentive for devs to utilise ps3 hardware because 360 install base is >>> ps3 install base IMO

 

[Todd33]

didn't they had 1 more year to play around with ps3 version??? wonder how game would look like on both platforms had they both been released last week not a year ago.

anyway there is less incentive for devs to utilise ps3 hardware because 360 install base is >>> ps3 install base IMO

Unless you know something we don't, we have no clue how how long they worked on it and with how many people.

It's Ubi's first PS3 games correct? It's essentially a launch port that was delayed. They probably did the math and realized this game didn't sell well on any platform so why waste money optimizing it.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Unless you know something we don't, we have no clue how how long they worked on it and with how many people.

It's Ubi's first PS3 games correct? It's essentially a launch port that was delayed. They probably did the math and realized this game didn't sell well on any platform so why waste money optimizing it.

Well by that logic, why waste money doing it at all? The game was already delayed 5 months, so we know they did spend that entire time optimizing it. Since they did push back release a full 5 months, obviously the poor performance can't all be attributed to lack of resources, and some blame has to go to the system/development tools.

Oblivion was a full 12 months between releases, saying "Well we really have no idea how long they worked on it" reeks of intellectual dishonesty. They had a whole year! Any way you slice it, they better improve something if given an entire 12 months to optimize.

 

[Todd33]

Well by that logic, why waste money doing it at all? The game was already delayed 5 months, so we know they did spend that entire time optimizing it. Since they did push back release a full 5 months, obviously the poor performance can't all be attributed to lack of resources, and some blame has to go to the system/development tools.

If you are so inclined, which you often are, blame the system first. We have no insider information about the port, but we do know other ports exceed the 360 counterpart, so are the tools and system better in those cases? It's your logic not mine...

Oblivion was a full 12 months between releases, saying "Well we really have no idea how long they worked on it" reeks of intellectual dishonesty. They had a whole year! Any way you slice it, they better improve something if given an entire 12 months to optimize.

And? The game wasn't even announced a few months before the PS3 launch, so maybe they spent six months, maybe they used half as many people. Maybe they spent more time and people, who knows? They at least took pride in their work and did it right.

Making a game from scratch on the 360 and then porting it to the PS3 is either going to take a combination of time and talent or turn out crappy. We see a little of both out there i the ports, so I have to ask what's the BFD?

 

[scooby_dooby]

If you are so inclined, which you often are, blame the system first. We have no insider information about the port, but we do know other ports exceed the 360 counterpart, so are the tools and system better in those cases? It's your logic not mine...

Actually I'm just saying both factors need to be acknowleged, don't you think that makes sense?

To say that they didn't put any effort into the port, when they delayed it 5 months, doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

And I never compared one system as being better than another, that's your own argument you've created there. I simply said, they must've had some problems with the HW or dev tools given the amount of time they did dedicate to the port.

so I have to ask what's the BFD?

I dunno? There is none to me, see my OP.

 

[Tiberium]

Well I kind of knew that already, I mean you cant expect getting better.

 

[Todd33]

Actually I'm just saying both factors need to be acknowleged, don't you think that makes sense?

To say that they didn't put any effort into the port, when they delayed it 5 months, doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

As soon as you have some concrete info on the reasons, why not assume the typical reason that ports suck? The Quake 4 port to the 360 sucked, I guess the 360 tools and hardware must be to blame, right?

Again, do the ports that are better mean the tools and hardware are better, "both factors need to be acknowleged" right? You will spread FUD as long as it is negative, but I never see you apply your logic in the reverse.

Games slip on all platforms for all reasons, I'm playing STALKER right now, that game was in development for 4+ years. How long has Halo 3 been in the works? If in doubt, blaim Sony and the PS3!

 

[PSman]

I'm not surprise at all. Ubisoft is just another lazy developer who doesn't have what it take, to take advantage of the PS3 powerful hardware. What a sloppy job. They should just keep SC4 on the 360.